OPPONENTS OF LINN/EUS. 
123 
ridiculous, was dimissedin 1747 from the Russian academy of sciences, 
and died a private man. 
Meanwhile Heister felt an inward satisfa&ion at the quarrel oi 
which he had himself been the author. Though no viftory ensued, 
yet he rejoiced in the teazing violence of the aggressions. In other 
respefts, he was prudent enough not to show himself direftly in 
the field of litigation. He screened himself behind his pupils, whom 
he had influenced with his spirit of resentment. With these he held 
disputations at Helmstadt replete with acrimony, and pointedly levelled 
against the northern reformer*. 
Do£!or Moehring at lever w, an able botanist, gave his opinion of 
those hostile dissertations, in a letter to Haller, in the following 
words : 44 They are a mass of turbulent verbosity ; the smallest minutiae 
44 are attacked in them, and matters censured which Linnaeus himself 
#s only pointed out as plausibilities, and which none of his opponents 
44 have thus far been able to expose in a clear light. If those literary 
44 brawlers had but so deservedly exerted themselves in botany as 
« Linnjeus, they would see, that it is easier to criticise, than by 
44 dint of the most arduous observations to discover truths and give 
44 new elucidations. How much better would it be, to remain an entire 
44 stranger to honours than thus impudently to attempt to lessen the 
44 reputation of another. Thus far can envy and party-spirit mislead 
44 us mortals !” 
* These were L. Heisteri Dissert, sistens meditationes et animadversiones in novum 
systema botanicum Sexuale Linn/ei; Respond. P. C. Goeckel, Helmst. 1741.— Disser- 
tatiode nominum plantarum mutatione utili ac noxia, Resp. J. E. Sandhagen, Helmst. 
1741, and several others. 
R 2 
Heister 
